Amtrak COO Crosbie terminated

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

jis

Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2003
Messages
39,127
Location
Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
According to reports circulating on a few other railroad related board, Amtrak COO Bill Crosbie has been let go yesterday. All his subordinates are now reporting directly to Boardman. Apparently the post is not going to be filled, and will be discontinued as part of a reorganization. That is all I have read and heard so far. more as it becomes available.

A report from UTU on this matter can be seen here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
From what I've read he was adverse to many of the bold new ideas many wantyed Amtrak to try, within reason, like a daily Sunsdet, restoration of New orleansd to Florida, ext of Cardinal to 'ansdas andf so on. This type of mindset is what Amtrak don't needs and ity's unforytunate there are somer like Crosbie who are weighing the entity down by failing to acty. Amtrak musyt be a wise railroad like it was in the 80s, with creative advertising andf euquipment purchasrs that doint take yearts & years. If Willy Crosbie was like that then good riddance7 go somerwhere else buddy.
 
From what I've read he was adverse to many of the bold new ideas many wantyed Amtrak to try, within reason, like a daily Sunsdet, restoration of New orleansd to Florida, ext of Cardinal to 'ansdas andf so on. This type of mindset is what Amtrak don't needs and ity's unforytunate there are somer like Crosbie who are weighing the entity down by failing to acty. Amtrak musyt be a wise railroad like it was in the 80s, with creative advertising andf euquipment purchasrs that doint take yearts & years. If Willy Crosbie was like that then good riddance7 go somerwhere else buddy.
What school did you not graduate from?
 
What school did you not graduate from?
I think (s)he was edumacated and gradueated from the 1st grade!
mosking.gif
 
According to a posting at trainorders, apparently Don Phillips (well known columnist at Trains) has been told by an Amtrak insider that Mr. Crosbie and Boardman had a low-key discussion and then Crosbie left the building calmly on his own (i.e. was not escorted out). His departure wasn't much of a surprise to Crosbie himself or anyone else at Amtrak.
 
LOL!!!

I was typing from a Blackberry in an Amfleet 1 that lost power; had a feeling my entries were straying off, plus there was the large can i smuggled on board.

Wow, that was funny.

But the problems William Crosbie might have given Amtrak aren't. I always hate when it comes to extreme decisions like this, but it seems like one that should've been done a long time ago.
 
Boardman's quote from the article is hilarious in its utter lack of compliment:

"Bill has made important contributions to Amtrak in the seven years he's been here, and his oversight of the many facets of the operation has supported Amtrak through a period of strong ridership and demand for our services," Boardman said in the employee advisory.
Ouch; that's about as meaningless as Human Resources saying "Yeah...he worked here from 2003-2010."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Boardman's quote from the article is hilarious in its utter lack of compliment:

"Bill has made important contributions to Amtrak in the seven years he's been here, and his oversight of the many facets of the operation has supported Amtrak through a period of strong ridership and demand for our services," Boardman said in the employee advisory.
Ouch; that's about as meaningless as Human Resources saying "Yeah...he worked here from 2003-2010."
What is worse is, at least as far as I understand from a few that are more in the know, Boardman is probably being kind :) One of them mentioned to me that as long as Crosbie was around there was no way no how that any of the proposed changes to LD service would take place because he would play interference all the way to the end. The only change he would work diligently towards is discontinuing any or all of them. This behavior goes back all the way to the discontinuance of the Three Rivers, which was not really justified by the numbers.
 
Well in that case, good riddance and good on Mr. Boardman for moving forward without him.

This means that we'll see a daily Cardinal going to STL and through cars from the Pennsy on the Cap at the next timetable change, right? :ph34r:
 
Well in that case, good riddance and good on Mr. Boardman for moving forward without him.

This means that we'll see a daily Cardinal going to STL and through cars from the Pennsy on the Cap at the next timetable change, right? :ph34r:
Yeah right! :rolleyes:

Though it does increase the chances that we will see it happen sooner rather than later or never.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm also thinking that the loss of the VRE contract and the on-going issues with Amtrak's MARC operation had become a major embarrassment for Amtrak.

With serious rail operation competition looming, Amtrak is trying to rebrand itself as the "operator of choice" for high-speed rail. It's an image rebuild that even has a new VP. But there is image and there is reality. To seemingly not be able to run a simple commuter operation was making Amtrak look incompetent within the media view of DOT and lawmakers from every state. Last summer was bad enough with the VRE debacle (and Amtrak's hissy fit after losing the contract), the stranded MARC train in 100 degree heat, and the MARC station run-by incident with MD officials on board. Boardman himself went to MARC stations to apologize and promise better service. Now, the Washington media is once again reporting MARC problems. Maybe Boardman had simply had enough.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now, the Washington media is once again reporting MARC problems. Maybe Boardman had simply had enough.
That's nothing more than the media searching for something to write about and rehashing old issues.

In my opinion, most of the fault for MARC operations lies with MARC - Amtrak could have done better, but without the appropriate level of oversight from MTA management, it's hard for me to fault Amtrak as much. MTA management was unaware of the fact that Amtrak was providing their "Daily Digest" before they were made aware of it after the "hell train" incident (I'm sure that I'm not the only person that told them about it, but when I discussed it with the MTA Administrator he seemed to be genuinely surprised and interested in it). Lo and behold, MARC now gets that data from Amtrak and CSX and posts it on the internet. I genuinely believe that the MTA had no data to address why trains were delayed (making it impossible to fix the root causes).

And yes, Jis - I realize that those expectations are wildly overstated. But, I like the chances of that happening a lot better now than I did yesterday!
 
Boardman's quote from the article is hilarious in its utter lack of compliment:

"Bill has made important contributions to Amtrak in the seven years he's been here, and his oversight of the many facets of the operation has supported Amtrak through a period of strong ridership and demand for our services," Boardman said in the employee advisory.
Ouch; that's about as meaningless as Human Resources saying "Yeah...he worked here from 2003-2010."
What is worse is, at least as far as I understand from a few that are more in the know, Boardman is probably being kind :) One of them mentioned to me that as long as Crosbie was around there was no way no how that any of the proposed changes to LD service would take place because he would play interference all the way to the end. The only change he would work diligently towards is discontinuing any or all of them. This behavior goes back all the way to the discontinuance of the Three Rivers, which was not really justified by the numbers.
QUESTION: Why was this guy in that position in the first place?
 
This behavior goes back all the way to the discontinuance of the Three Rivers, which was not really justified by the numbers.
This is interesting. The subject of a resurrected Broadway Limited comes up every once in a while; and the nay sayers come out of the woodwork saying that it and the 3 Rivers failed then and will fail again because of lack of passengers.

I don't know what the numbers were; but I always suspected other causes played a major part: track conditions, equipment shortage, a no-amenity consist, etc. Not to mention that then is then, and now is now.
 
This behavior goes back all the way to the discontinuance of the Three Rivers, which was not really justified by the numbers.
This is interesting. The subject of a resurrected Broadway Limited comes up every once in a while; and the nay sayers come out of the woodwork saying that it and the 3 Rivers failed then and will fail again because of lack of passengers.

I don't know what the numbers were; but I always suspected other causes played a major part: track conditions, equipment shortage, a no-amenity consist, etc. Not to mention that then is then, and now is now.
I rode the 3R's in early November of 2000, back when it still ran with a Heritage sleeper. I think that sleeper was at least 3/4ths sold out, if not sold out. Don't really recall what coach was doing.

When the Heritage sleepers were retired thanks to the toilet & truck issues, a Viewliner was put on that train. That really strained the resources for those cars. So with the loss of the freight contracts, that became a big reason for killing that train. Lack of a diner hurt, but I don't think that it was a killer either. I just went to the cafe car and picked out what I wanted for free.

My guess is that a revived 3R's or B'way Limited running that route wouldn't do all that much worse than any other Amtrak LD train, and probably better than many of the LD runs. The key right now is lack of equipment, and of course what might NS now charge to restore the service.
 
...So with the loss of the freight contracts, that became a big reason for killing that train.
Just to clarify, Amtrak did not "lose" the contracts in the sense that the freight shippers, most notably the USPS, pulled out on Amtrak. Amtrak cancelled the contracts unilaterally, much to the displeasure of the shippers, at least one of which took Amtrak to court over the action. Since the decision to not carry mail and express was entirely Amtrak's, the resulting cancellation of the Three Rivers was similarly entirely Amtrak's decision. It was probably a good decision to drop M&E, but it was Amtrak's call and no one else.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
...So with the loss of the freight contracts, that became a big reason for killing that train.
Just to clarify, Amtrak did not "lose" the contracts in the sense that the freight shippers, most notably the USPS, pulled out on Amtrak. Amtrak cancelled the contracts unilaterally, much to the displeasure of the shippers, at least one of which took Amtrak to court over the action. Since the decision to not carry mail and express was entirely Amtrak's, the resulting cancellation of the Three Rivers was similarly entirely Amtrak's decision. It was probably a good decision to drop M&E, but it was Amtrak's call and no one else.
Agreed! :)

And I didn't mean to imply that Amtrak "lost" the contracts.
 
QUESTION: Why was this guy in that position in the first place?
When you hire someone, you hire the person best able to do the job you want done. Crosbie was hired during the Bush administration, and the Bush administration wanted Amtrak dead. Just as a HR director might hire an idiot to make the Manager of the operation look bad, so might the Bush administration suggest the hiring of people that were not to the company's benefit.

You hire the person right for the job... but the question is, what job?
 
QUESTION: Why was this guy in that position in the first place?
When you hire someone, you hire the person best able to do the job you want done. Crosbie was hired during the Bush administration, and the Bush administration wanted Amtrak dead. Just as a HR director might hire an idiot to make the Manager of the operation look bad, so might the Bush administration suggest the hiring of people that were not to the company's benefit.

You hire the person right for the job... but the question is, what job?
I believe Crosbie came in with Gunn - both Canadians - although Gunn holds dual citizenship. Crosbie had operating experience, but not much in the way of personal interaction. Never visible, didn't ride trains much and was contrary to a lot of improvement ideas.
 
QUESTION: Why was this guy in that position in the first place?
When you hire someone, you hire the person best able to do the job you want done. Crosbie was hired during the Bush administration, and the Bush administration wanted Amtrak dead. Just as a HR director might hire an idiot to make the Manager of the operation look bad, so might the Bush administration suggest the hiring of people that were not to the company's benefit.

You hire the person right for the job... but the question is, what job?
Bill Crosbie was and still is a close friend of former Amtrak president, David Gunn. David Gunn was hired during the Clinton administration. Crosbie was one of Gunn's guys, for better or worse.
 
Bill Crosbie was and still is a close friend of former Amtrak president, David Gunn. David Gunn was hired during the Clinton administration. Crosbie was one of Gunn's guys, for better or worse.
You may want to double-check who was in the White House in 2002, which is when Gunn was hired.

That said, even though the president (of the US) appoints people to the Amtrak board, I really don't think any administration in recent times has really had that significant a hand in personnel decisions.
 
Bill Crosbie was and still is a close friend of former Amtrak president, David Gunn. David Gunn was hired during the Clinton administration. Crosbie was one of Gunn's guys, for better or worse.
You may want to double-check who was in the White House in 2002, which is when Gunn was hired.

That said, even though the president (of the US) appoints people to the Amtrak board, I really don't think any administration in recent times has really had that significant a hand in personnel decisions.
Oops, you're right. For some reason I thought he was hired in 1999. Maybe it only seemed like he was there forever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top